pf_03464 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1 Member Traynor asked if a condition could be added to require no parking in driveway 2 for safety purposes. Thomas Paschke explained that the City attempts to retain the right- 3 of-way, but administering conditions and code is difficult. 4 5 Member Ipsen asked what applicant response was" (Opposed because of trees and 6 driveway removal). 7 8 Member Peper asked if trees along the west side would be removed. (None) 9 10 Mr. Gisvold said the City staff proposal would require tree removal. He said he was 11 opposed to the staff proposal because it would abut windows, remove trees and create 12 backing problems. Mr. Gisvold said he has no plans to park in the boulevard area. 13 14 Member Bakeman said he now has two cars and a boat. 15 16 There were no public comments offered. 17 18 Vice Chair Mulder closed the hearing and asked the Commission for comments. 19 20 Member Bakeman stated she was concerned with parking on the boulevard because of 21 safety-line of sight issues on adjoining property when backing out of driveway. 22 23 Vice Chair Mulder said the massive nature of the architecture may require windows 24 and/or other treatment to eliminate stark walls. 25 26 Vice Chair Mulder stated the City alternative creates as may problems. The applicant's 27 proposal works well, but parking in the boulevard should not be allowed. 28 29 Member Bakeman said she does not like either motion. 30 31 General discussion ensued regarding garage depth. 32 33 Motion: Member Bakeman moved, seconded by Member Traynor, to recommend 34 approval ofa variance to Section 1004.02D5 of the Roseville City Code for Roland 35 Gisvold, 970 Transit Avenue, allowing the construction of an attached two stall garage 36 based on the findings in Section 5 and conditions of Section 6 and a condition that no 37 parking on the driveway of the project report dated May 7, 2003. 38 39 Member Peper stated he was opposed to prohibiting parking in the driveway. 40 41 Ayes: 5 42 Nays: 0 43 Motion carried. 44